Effects of Linux Scheduling Algorithms on Mininet Network Performance
Communications
Volume 3, Issue 5, September 2015, Pages: 128-136
Received: Jul. 16, 2015; Accepted: Aug. 3, 2015; Published: Aug. 19, 2015
Views 5876      Downloads 142
Authors
Mohammed Basheer Al-Somaidai, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Mosul University, Mosul, Iraq
Estabrak Bassam Yahya, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Mosul University, Mosul, Iraq
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Software Defined Network (SDN) is considered a burgeoning technology in the field of computer networks particularly and in communication technologies in general. A promising architecture of SDN mainly depends on decoupling mechanisms of the control and management plane from the data forwarding plane in network device. Besides, the use of programmable interfaces between network layers. In another word, SDN uses open, flexible, and dynamic architecture that is defined through the use of different software's programming languages. Simulation and emulation network platforms play an important role in studying and evaluating different networks design and performance. Mininet is the most popular SDN platform. This research is concerned with the impacts of operating system scheduling algorithms used by Mininet emulator on network performance with different controllers and topologies types and sizes. It has been noted that network performance under PROC scheduling algorithm was better and more stable than those under CFS or RT scheduling algorithms. As well, when network topology be more complicated, i.e. contains a large number of switches and presence of loops, the network performance is worse than that with simple topology especially, this case is more worse with RT scheduling algorithm
Keywords
SDN, Mininet, RT, CFS, PROC
To cite this article
Mohammed Basheer Al-Somaidai, Estabrak Bassam Yahya, Effects of Linux Scheduling Algorithms on Mininet Network Performance, Communications. Vol. 3, No. 5, 2015, pp. 128-136. doi: 10.11648/j.com.20150305.18
References
[1]
Open Network Foundation (ONF),"Software-defined networking: the new norm for networks", April 2012, Available at: https:// www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/openflow/wp-sdn-newnorm.pdf, accessed on 25/10/2014.
[2]
L. MacVittie, "The Programmable Network", white paper, F5 Networks, Inc., 2013.
[3]
S. Jain, A. Kumar, S. Mandal, J. Ong, L. Poutievski, A. Singh, S. Venkata, J. Wanderer, J. Zhou, M. Zhu, J. Zolla, U. Holzle, S. Stuart and A. Vahdat, "B4: experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN", SIGCOMM’13 Hong Kong, China, pp. 3-14, August 2013.
[4]
Migration Working Group, "Migration use cases and methods", Open Networking Foundation (ONF), February 2014, available at : https:// www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdn-resources/use-cases/Migration-WG-Use-Cases.pdf, accessed on 25/10/2014.
[5]
Open Network Foundation (ONF), "OpenFlow-enabled SDN and network functions virtualization", February 2014, available at :https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdn-resources/solution-briefs/sb-sdn-nvf-solution.pdf, accessed on 25/10/2014.
[6]
T. Nadeau and K. Gray, "SDN: Software Defined Networks", first ed., O’Reilly Media, Inc., August 2013.
[7]
Open Network Foundation (ONF), "SDN architecture", June 2014, available at: https:// www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdnresources/technical reports/TR_SDN_ARCH_1.0 _06062014.pdf, accessed on 25/10/2014.
[8]
S. Azodolmolky, "Software Defined Networking with OpenFlow", Packt Publishing, 1st ed., October 2013.
[9]
Open Network Foundation (ONF), "OpenFlow switch specification, version 1.4.0 (wire protocol 0x05)", October 2013. Available at: https://www.opennetworking.org/images/stories/downloads/sdnresources/onfspecifications/openflow/openflow-spec-v1.4.0.pdf, accessed on 25/10/2014.
[10]
A. Clemm, and R. Wolter, "network-embedded management and applications understanding programmable networking infrastructure", Springer New York, 2013.
[11]
B. Lantz, B. Heller, and N. McKeown, "A network in a lap-top: rapid prototyping for software-defined networks", In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks New York, 2010.
[12]
S. Yeganeh, A. Tootoonchian, and Y. Ganjali, "On scalability of software-defined networking", IEEE Communications Magazine, February 2013.
[13]
M. Großmann, S. Schuberth, "Auto-Mininet: assessing the Internet topology zoo in a software-defined network emulator", 7ter Workshop Leitungs-, (MMBnet 2013), Hamburg, Germany, 2013.
[14]
B. Nunes, M. Mendonca, X. Nguyen, K. Obraczka, and T. Turletti, "A survey of software-defined networking: past, present, and future of programmable networks", IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, in press, January 2014.
[15]
P. Wette, M. Draxler, A. Schwabe, F. Wallaschek, M. Zahraee, and H. Karl, "MaxiNet: distributed emulation of software-defined networks", IFIP networking conference, copyright © ISBN 978-3-901882-58-6, 2014.
[16]
G. Glass, K. Ables, "Linux for programmers and users", Prentice Hall, copyright © Pearson Education, Inc., February 2006.
[17]
C. Blue, V. Seeker, "Process scheduling in Linux", University of Edinburgh, December 2013, available at:http://www.criticalblue.com/news/Wpcontent/uploads/2013/12/linux_scheduler_notes_final.pdf on 25/10/2014.
[18]
D. Bovet, M. Cesati, "Understanding the Linux kernel", O'Reilly, 1st. ed., October 2000.
[19]
G. Cheng, "A comparison of two Linux schedulers", M.Sc. Thesis, Oslo and Akershus University, College of Applied Sciences, 2012.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186